peerglass_ooni_report

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations cover safety profile (readOnly/idempotent). Description adds crucial behavioral constraint 'last 30 days' not present in annotations, and details specific measurement categories. Could improve by mentioning probe coverage limitations or rate limits.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Well-structured with clear sections: purpose statement, Args block, Returns line. No filler. Front-loaded with key scope (30 days, country-level) in first sentence. Docstring-style format is efficient.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Complete for moderate complexity (1 nested param object). With output schema present, description appropriately focuses on behavior and parameter semantics rather than return structure. Addresses all 3 sub-parameters via Args section.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so description carries full burden. Args section compensates perfectly: documents country_code format (ISO 3166-1 alpha-2 with examples), domain purpose (filter), and response_format options (markdown/json with default).

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

Specific verb 'Fetch' + resource 'OONI censorship measurements' + clear scope 'country over the last 30 days'. Distinguishes from siblings like peerglass_dns_censorship by specifying OONI probe methodology and specific measurement types (Tor, Psiphon, Signal).

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Provides clear context about what data is returned (blocked websites, circumvention tools) and the 30-day time window, helping agents understand when OONI data is appropriate. Lacks explicit 'when-not' guidance or named sibling alternatives (e.g., vs peerglass_dns_censorship).

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.